Today the Court of Appeal at the Palace of Justice, Putrajaya is hearing the appeal against the landmark judgment of Justice Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim in the Nizar vs Zambry case delivered last Monday, 11th May 2009 declaring Nizar as the lawful Perak Mentri Besar.
Nizar is not getting a five-member Court of Appeal panel. The three judges hearing Nizar’s application to discharge Zambry’s “stay order” obtained by a single-judge Court of Appeal within 24 hours of the historic judgment and Zambry’s appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment are justices Md Raus Sharif, Zainun Ali and Ahmad Maarop.
As I said in my tweet two hours ago:
“Parties agree that appeal proper b heard 1st and if at the end of hear’g ct cant give decision then discharge of stay will have 2 b heard.”
While we wait for the outcome from the Court of Appeal, the landmark Abdul Aziz judgment which illuminates the complicated terrain thrown up by the Perak constitutional crisis is worth reading (here).
The following Star report sums up the judgment:
Why MB can’t be sacked – Nizar does not hold office at the pleasure of the Ruler, says judge
By M. MAGESWARI and LISA GOHKUALA LUMPUR: The mentri besar cannot be dismissed by the Sultan because he does not hold office at the pleasure of the Ruler, the High Court here ruled.
High Court (Appellate and Special Powers) judge Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim said the Sultan could remove members of the Perak Executive Council from their office but not the mentri besar.
He said this in his 78-page judgment, in which he declared Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as the valid Perak Mentri Besar as his office “has not become vacant”.
The oral judgment was handed down on May 11.
“Article 16(7) of the Perak Constitution says that the mentri besar does not hold office at the pleasure of His Royal Highness,” the judge said in the judgment made available to the press yesterday.
Once a mentri besar is appointed, he is only answerable to the state legislative assembly, he said.
“I hold the view that a vote of no-confidence on the floor of the assembly is required to remove the mentri besar,” Justice Abdul Aziz said.
Nizar filed a judicial review on Feb 13 to challenge the legitimacy of Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir as mentri besar and his state government.
Justice Abdul Aziz said he adopted the reasoning in the case of Stephen Kalong Ningkan v. Tun Abang Haji Openg and Tawi Sli in Sarawak, in which the judge ruled that “the Governor may dismiss ministers but may not dismiss the chief minister in any circumstances”.
He noted that under the framework of a constitutional monarchy, the ruler was expected to discharge his constitutional role and functions in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
The Sultan was satisfied as to who commanded the majority in the state legislative assembly when he concluded that Nizar had ceased to command the confidence of the majority, Justice Abdul Aziz said.
“But the stark fact is that there never was any vote of no-confidence taken against Nizar nor had he had gone to the Sultan to request for a dissolution because he had lost the command of the majority. So, how could one say Nizar had ceased to command the confidence of the majority?” he asked.
The High Court also ruled that it was fine for the Sultan to determine who had majority in the assembly to appoint a mentri besar.
However, the Sultan’s opinion that Dr Zambry was likely to command the confidence of the majority in the assembly was not applicable in deciding that Nizar had lost the majority.
“I would say that the personal opinion or judgment of His Royal Highness is irrelevant,” he noted.
Justice Ahmad Maarop is one of the judges appointed by Lingam. The odd is against Nizar.
We should have confidence that the Court of Appeal will return justice to Datuk Zambry. It is obvious that BN has made up the majority of the State Assembly and hence the Menteri Besar should come from BN. This is a simple logic yet I find it hilarious why so many people failed to understand it and cause such a big crisis for the State. Nizar and PR should be responsible for all the loss suffered by the State arising from the crisis. He is also a traitor of Malays as he had go against the wish of our Royal Ruler of the State.
Kasim Amat,
I will be glad to see that the Court of Appeal will grant favour to the petition of Zambry so that there is a court ruling saying that the monarch has the discretionary power to sack a Menteri Besar based on the monarch’s personal perception that the Menteri Besar has lost the confidence of majority of the State Assembly, without having to resort to a resolution in the state assembly for a motion of no cobfidence against the Menteri Besar. I would rather see that the present right thinking Agong be given the power to sack Najib by further inference of the derived power to be obtained by the Agong based on your desired outcome of the court case of Zambry Vs Nizar.
I understand very well that such a power of dismissal, when given to the monarch, will only make a Menteri Besar or a Prime Minister a submissive servant to the monarch. However, at the present moment, I think a monarch shall be able to serve as a much better Chief Executive than either the pompous Zambry or the hypocritical Najib for there is no need for the Monarch to transfer the nation’s assets to a foreign account like what many greedy BN politicians did because the Sultanate will only thrive in the monarch’s own lands of jurisdiction in Malaysia when the money is kept in the monarch’s own lands.
At least, when the Sultan ruled in the past before the Independence of Malaysia in 1957, the money was still flowing within the financial and banking system of Malaysia and the economic activities would not be shrinked and plumeted in a brief period as short as an overnight nightmare like what we encountered quite often nowadays.
Najib is good for nothing because he is the first Prime Minister who is willing to give up his Executive Power to the Monarch by saying that the Sultan has the power to sack a Menteri Besar.
On 21st May 2009 at 15:54.06, Kasim Amat said:
We should have confidence that the Court of Appeal will return justice to Datuk Zambry.
Of course, the supporters of UMNO’s BN should have such confidence in the Court of Appeal if there are judges who are supposedly independent and yet also friendly to UMNO’s BN.
But let’s not forget that any court of law is supposed to return justice to the people, not ‘selective justice’ to certain politicians in UMNO’s BN…
On 21st May 2009 at 15:54.06, Kasim Amat said:
It is obvious that BN has made up the majority of the State Assembly and hence the Menteri Besar should come from BN. This is a simple logic yet I find it hilarious why so many people failed to understand it and cause such a big crisis for the State.
The 12th GE gave 31 seats to PR and 28 seats to UMNO’s BN in the Perak DUN, but when those 3 defected from PR, they stopped short of crossing over completely into UMNO’s BN wholeheartedly and instead declared themselves as independents but friendly to UMNO’s BN. Obviously, UMNO’s BN did not want to eat its words after heavily criticising the P.Pauh MP’s bid to get UMNO’s BN MPs to defect and crossover into PR. So, after the defections, the Perak DUN has 28 seats for PR, 28 seats for UMNO’s BN and 3 seats for the independents who are ex-PR. So, by logic, UMNO’s BN would only have a clear official majority, provided those 3 defectors are officially its members and not independents. If that’s the case, it’s no wonder that the people, especially the good citizens of Perak, find it difficult to understand the kind of majority claimed by UMNO’s BN in the Perak DUN, and of course, only the supporters of UMNO’s BN would find some form of hilarity in the people’s difficulty, even to the extent of blaming the people for the crisis when it was actually started by the Pekan MP…
On 21st May 2009 at 15:54.06, Kasim Amat said:
Nizar and PR should be responsible for all the loss suffered by the State arising from the crisis.
Of course, UMNO’s BN & its supporters refuse to take responsibility and want to blame PR for every single political crisis and whatever losses suffered from it, etc, etc, etc.
No surprise that UMNO’s BN is trying to put forth a message to the people that “inilah akibatnya bila kamu mengundi Pakatan Rakyat, dan oleh itu, ingatlah kamu semua… undilah BN dimasa akan datang kerana terbuktilah mengundi Pakatan Rakyat memang membawa padah…”
On 21st May 2009 at 15:54.06, Kasim Amat said:
He is also a traitor of Malays as he had go against the wish of our Royal Ruler of the State.
Despite many accusations by UMNO’s BN and its supporters that Nizar is a traitor, it’s quite surprising that none of them has stepped up to have Nizar prosecuted for treason. Anyway, their allegations and accusations of treason have not stopped Nizar from getting elected as the Bukit Gantang MP because the people know better.
We have a chain reaction here
in terms of court cases
A sued B, B sued A, A counter sued, B counter sued
Judgement made, judgement overruled
judgement over-overruled
This court, that court
Lower, higher, federal, kangaroo
Kepala pusing la
Pity all law students going through the big, fat legal mess